The refugee “crisis” of Europe and its causes

Beril Dedeoğlu, Minister of European Union Affairs, has said, before the “Turkey Progress Report,” diplomats of the union offered her a softer report on condition that “Turkey will allow the Syrian refugees to stay in Turkey.”

Aside from this proposal, which can be interpreted as bribery if not blackmail, of course we know the ideas of the European countries on the refugees who they define as a “crisis.”

For example Merkel's ideas. Before the dead body of Aylan Kurdi washed ashore, causing public pressure in Europe on the refugee issue, Merkel did not have a positive attitude toward Turkey's EU membership and expressed this several times with very harsh words.

But after the flow of the Syrian refugees into Europe, more important than that after it appeared in the media she visited Turkey, with a soft manner she gave “hopeful” messages to our EU process and got to the point.

Merkel said the refugees would flow into Europe through Turkey, and Turkey should be supported in this issue.

As for France, it offered to pay Turkey only if Turkey would keep the refugees away from the European borders.

Besides this there were European countries which declared that they wanted to accept the refugees, but since there was no mosque in their countries they could not accept them. There were also those who beat them back with batons…

When all these are looked it is clear that they see Turkey as a barricade set in front of the refugee flow. They do not want the Syrian refugees in their countries because of concerns about sterility.

Namely, the Europeans obviously think that the Syrians will “distort the image.”

They are concerned about these people to carry their poverty, dirt, misery, and desperation from the Middle East to Europe.

The reason the European countries do not want the refugees in Europe: the economic aspect is not the first thing, because almost all of them offer financial aid.

They want the arrangement to be: “We'll pay you, and you look after them.”

Of course there is a possibility that the decision makers of the European countries see the Syrians and the Middle Easterners as potential criminals …

But they should know that the refugees are only people who are displaced from their homes and countries. Most of them have occupations.

However reflection of the similar “exclusivist” manner as hate speech towards Muslims and immigrants becoming more frequent periodically decreases this possibility.

What remains – for me – is the “pristine image passion” that forms the basis of xenophobia, thus the racism and with this mediation the moral crisis.

Yes, Europe promises aid for the Syrian refugees but they even don't do this for moral reasons. They offer aid because they inwardly know the truth: “the extreme poverty of the poorest is directly proportionate to the surrounding fear and weakness of the rich.”

Even if there is a country like Turkey “looking after” 2 million people, functioning as an airbag between the refugees and themselves, they know that one day the obstacles holding those borders will be crossed.

Europe promises aid, they don't want the foreigners to overflow into those borders.

That's the point civilization has reached.

Nobody who is not crazy would say ozone layer depletion, polluting the atmosphere or causing the extinction of some animal species would be good and useful.

Still these could be in question, although they were imprisoned with a moral hatred universally and with the great support of the world public opinion.

Racism and xenophobia are like that…Even if we find them moral or not they exist…Even if we love or not…